Identifying Postmodernism, Reflections on Steve Taylor’s approach.

Reading "Seeking definition: postmodern" in the first chapter of Steve's thesis "A New Way of Being Church" is both a bit like seeing a maze from a helicopter andstanding in the centre of the maze wondering how you got there and which route will get you out again! It is the most postmodern way of defining postmodern that you can possibly get. Steve suggests that the word used to describe the postmodern reflects the stance or approach that the author takes. He offers four categories. 1. The labelling critique Uses: Hyper-modern; ultra modern; liquid modernity; post-modern; post modern; Post Modern.

All of this reflects critical questions about the relationship between modern and the postmodern and whether one emphasises continuity or discontinuity. Page 15

Reading: Oden, The Death of Modernity in The Challenge of Bauman, Liquid Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000 2. The lens critique Uses: postmodernity, Postmodernism. This describes the sociological or philosophical lens that peopleview the cultural shift through. One who sees sociological change (technological,global, capital) will refer to it as postmodernism. Those who see the change through the philosophical lens (deconstructionism) will refer to it as postmodernity. 3. Paradigm Critique Uses: Post-Modern

At it's most simplistic, 2000 years of history are divided into threeparadigms: pre-modern, modern and postmodern. Page 15

Steve acknowledges the over simplicity but uses it to show how the term is usedto describe a shift in cultural awareness. Reading: Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: UCP. 1962 Pillay, Text Paradigms in context. Missionalia 18, 1, 1990, 109-123 4. The Colonising Critique Postmodernism is simply another way for the west to impose an "oppressive meta narrative that homogenises cultural diversity through a western way ofviewing the world" (Page 15). Reading: Sardar, Postmodernism and the other, London: Pluto Press. 1998 He concludes his definition with simplicity its self:

In essence, this debate is about how to accurately name cultural change. It isabout ones angle of looking, whether sociological, philosophical or historical. Yet despite this debate, I have not read any author who thinks culture is the same now as it was fifty years ago. Thus when I use the term, I will, like all the authors above, be referencing a cultural shift, the fact that our world today is very different from a world fifty years ago. Page 15-16

Grenz, Renewing the Centre, Chapter 3 : The Shaping of Neo-Evangelical Theology

This chapter outlines two major influences on what became mainstream evangelical (or neo-evangelical, as Stanley prefers) theology. The two main influences were Carl Henry and Bernard Ramm.

In prolific writing careers that spanned the first forty years of the new evangelical movement, Henry and Ramm demonstrated the kind of intellectual engagement that Harold Ockenga had in mind when he voiced his desire for a coalition of conservative Protestants who would "infiltrate rather than separate". (Page 85)

In a detailed summary of their main theological perspectives Stanley seeks to show how they attempted to remain true to genuine orthodox belief while moving beyond fundamentalism. Although they shared a common aim, they brought two different perspectives into the evangelical community. Stanley identifies Carl's goal as modest:

He merely desired to lay down the epistemological and methodological foundation upon which other evangelicals could construct a solid theological system. (Page 100)

A prolific writer Carl was a rational apologist for evangelicalism and his foundation was studied and built on by many. While serious thinking and thorough examination was part of his method, he:

never lost sight of his own conversion experience. And he truly desired that evangelicals would be a gospel people, that is a people who would both articulate and live the good news of God' power to transform individuals lives and society. (Page 100).

Bernard Ramm followed similar principles to Carl Henry but his emphasis was not upon apologetic theology but on biblical theology. Bringing the bible in to conversation with the modern intellectual realm of science. He believed that:

divine revelation was not in competition with the best of modern learning but the two coalesced. For this reason he was able to gain an appreciation for the positive contributions of the Enlightenment and thereby move beyond the cautious stance of Henry (Page 115)

Stanley Grenz on Postmodernism.

Postmodernism defies definition.  It is a complex phenomenon encompassing a variety of elements.  Whatever else it may mean, however postmodernism is, as the designation it's self indicates, "post-modern".  The post modern ethos is on the one hand modern; it retains the modern.  Rather than calling for a return to some premodern situation, the post modern outlook accepts the enlightenment, especially in its elevation of skeptical rationality.  On the other hand, the post modern ethos is post modern; it sees the dangers inherent in the very skeptical rationality it accepts.  For this reason, it seeks to live in the realm of chastened rationality.

Renewing the Centre, Page 168-9

Reflections on Colossians remixed chapter 3

I was lying awake this morning pondering the fictional account by Nympha of her conversion.  Brian and Sylvia have done an excellent job of placing the letter into its original context. However in the account of her conversion, Nympha says:

One day in a conversation with these Christians I found I was using the word we. I had, almost without noticing it, thrown my lot in with Jesus and his followers. I had become a Christian. The Christian community in Laodicea now meets as an assembly in my house. Page 57

Which raises some questions for me. While I am happy that everyone has a different experience of coming to faith but there is no mention of Baptism. It is clear from the New Testament that Baptism is an important part of the induction or initiation to the Christian faith. When I read some of the Church Fathers account of life and faith I seem to remember that Baptism was an important part of final inclusion into the community of Jesus followers. The omission of it here could be:

• An oversight by the authors.
• A deliberate omission because the letter of Colossians omits mention of Baptism.
• An imposition of the authors own theological conviction that progressive conversion is the most likely form of conversion in the early church.
• An attempt by the authors to subvert the current dominant Evangelical emphasis on a conversion moment.

Given the authors stance on subversion throughout the book I prefer the latter!

Walsh and Keesmaat on Postmodernity

Postmodernity, then, can be described as a period of cultural disquiet.  In the face of betrayals and faliures of past overarching metanarratives, culture wide suspicion and incredulity takes hold.  A single story, providing coherence to personal identity, grounding for ethical action and passion for life in history is displaced by a carnivalesque existence of fragmentation, numbness and boredom.  Final decisions based on rational analysis give way to the undecidability of keeping all options open and the spiritual promiscuity of pop religion.  (Walsh and Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed, 2004, Page 25)

Lyotard on postmodernity

Simplifying in the extreme, I define postmodernity as incredulity toward all metanarratives.  (Lyotard, Postmodern Condition, p. xxiv, Quoted by Walsh & Keesmaat 2004)

Mark Berry on Post Modernity

Mark Berry of "Way out West" posted on The reluctant souls blog in a discussion about mission (find it here)

Yes the debate about postmodernity/postevangelical has bee raging for years and many are now reflecting that postmodernity is not a helpful way to understand the paradigm shift that is underway... perhaps we need to use something like transitional-modernity, expressing the idea that we are not yet in a new cultural paradigm but in a transitional phase of modernity... the resulting cultural paradigm as yet unclear.

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=14665188&postID=113377759156165505

Glen Marshall on Modernity and Post-Modernity

"Modernity was at it's most settled in the nineteenth century" "In modernity to be faithful is to be certain" "We don't know how to allow people to believe and have questions".

Trying to work out what “Post Modern” means and what “Post Modernity” is.

I was talking with my friend Keith, who has been helping me think through the implications of my research proposal. He started off by saying that it might be helpful to have a post modern thinker to interact with but by the end of the discussion he was suggesting that perhaps it would be better to look at something specific in culture in order to evaluate it. One of the problems with contemporary culture is that it is so diverse. Community is experienced by people on many different levels, it may be through work, though the gym, through the children's school. When I have conducted Baptisms it has not been unusual for people to travel hundreds of miles to experience the baptism of someone with whom they share some kind of community experience. Andrew Jones (aka tallskinnykiwi) was saying the same thing as Keith today as he responded to some criticisms of the Emerging Church movement. Andrew tackles the issue of post modernism from a tangible cultural perspective, rather than from engaging with a lofty academic who probably doesn't know how to operate his Sky+.

My lectures in the past 3 years concerning the emerging church have been more associated with impacting the new media culture (with titles like "Forward Slash", "Rhizome Cowboy" and "EmergAnt") because i feel this area is more important to understand right now that the postmodern writings of Derrida or Lyotard. And this is an area that teenage kids seem to know more intuitively than us.

He also says that "Although some of us have been teaching on more contemporary cultural challenges, we are sometimes reluctantly pulled back to discuss these same issues. You can understand the distaste in re-ploughing the same ground when there is so much to understand about our present culture." And to some extent I agree. In many ways I don't want to engage with lofty academic thesis that has no relevance to the work I want to do. The problem is that in order to have a coherent view of why we are doing what we are doing, we need to take an academic look at it. It's a bit like a scientist finding a new species, they have to examine it in order to understand it and what it is related to. Though Andrew may not want to rehearse old arguments, it might be argued that by being a blogger he invites the rehearsal of old arguments because blog discussion is driven by what is being said in the blog-sphere. I for one, appreciate the rehearsal of these arguments because after 5 years of church planting and 2 and a half years of being a regular minister, I am only just beginning to understand that the reason traditional forms of church are haemorrhaging people is because the culture has moved on so much.

Rev Dr Steve Taylor (aka emergantkiwi) on Postmodernity

I would group critiques of postmodernity into five camps.

1. the hypen and the hyper - a labeling critique.
2. the ism and the ity - a lens critique.
3. the paradigm critique.
4. the colonising critique.
5. the good old days critique.

I concluded by noting that none of the above in anyway suggest that culture has not changed. I have never read anyone who thinks culture is the same now as it was 50 years ago. What is contested is how to accurately name the changes, and the impact of these changes about people. http://www.emergentkiwi.org.nz/archives/the_postmodern_contest.php

 

I also wonder if the postmodern shift is so deep, so profoundly disorientating, that the need for deep mission demands a focus on context, that might yield very little fruit for many years. After all, it took Isreal over 70 years to emerge from exile, let alone rack up the "conversions." http://www.emergentkiwi.org.nz/archives/two_contrasting_missional_opinions.php

Next Page »